1. NCAAB
  2. Tue, Dec 1
  3. UTA @ CSU
NCAAB · Tue, Dec 1

UT Arlington Mavericks at Colorado State Rams

Moby Arena · at Colorado St
#258UTAUT Arlington
@
#87CSUColorado St
LineNo line yet 
Total— 
UTAThis seasonCSU
0-0Record0-0
0-0ATS0-0
0-0O/U0-0

ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders

Model: projects CSU 80–62 · win probability CSU 94%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 141.6
Model edge
—
No market line yet
Public
—
No split yet for this game
The model has not beaten the closing line: with an edge of 3 or more it went 409-367 in 2025-26. Model record

What could decide it: CSU has more of the edges

UTA 2, CSU 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
CSUBig
UTA offense vs CSU defense
Offense 289th of 366 against a defense 61st, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
UTA has played the 268th-hardest schedule, CSU the 96th. A record against a soft schedule means less
CSUBig
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UTA 7%, CSU 67%. Transfers in: UTA 5, CSU 1. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
CSUSmall
CSU offense vs UTA defense
Offense 103rd of 366 against a defense 211th, on the model’s ratings
CSUSmall
Three-pointers
UTA hits 29.1% and allows 26.9%; CSU hits 38.6% and allows 34.2%. Threes are 30.7% and 49.1% of their shots
CSUSmall
Free throws
Free throw rate: UTA 42.5, CSU 39.4. Allowed: UTA 40.9, CSU 34.2
UTASmall
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UTA 20.7%, CSU 18.5%. Forced: UTA 18.0%, CSU 15.4%
UTASmall
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UTA 34.9%, CSU 30.0%. Defensive: UTA 69.9%, CSU 70.8%
CSUSmall
Home court
CSU at home. This season: CSU 0-0 at home, UTA 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 66 possessions: UTA plays 67.3 a game (265th fastest), CSU 64.4 (355th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: UTA 47.2 and allows 47.5; CSU 57.5 and allows 52.9
Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Market

Open → current
Spread
Opening line not available
Total
 
Moneyline
—

Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.

Model vs market

MarketModelModel edge
Spread—CSU -17.7—
Total—141.6—
Projected score—UTA 61.9 · CSU 79.7

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›
ModelActual
1H spreadCSU -10.4—
1H total66.3—
1H projected scoreUTA 27.9 · CSU 38.3—
The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Colorado St has the better starters

Position by position: UT Arlington 0, Colorado St 1, even 4
UT ArlingtonBetterColorado St
G M. Panoam TR0.9 pts · 0.9 reb · 0.7 ast Not ranked
No call
G J. Menard TR12.8 pts · 2.9 reb · 3.8 ast Score 79
F T. McDaniels TR12 pts · 6.1 reb · 1 ast Score 68
Even
G J. Pascarelli10.2 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.3 ast Score 64
F M. Goodman3.2 pts · 2.5 reb · 0.1 ast Score 11
CSUBig
G J. Butler9.4 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.8 ast Score 67
F B. McGlothin TR0 pts · 0.5 reb · 0 ast Not ranked
No call
F K. Jorgensen11.5 pts · 4.3 reb · 2.2 ast Score 87
F N. Bundalo TR0.5 pts · 0.5 reb · 0 ast Not ranked
No call
F C. Booth10.7 pts · 5.6 reb · 0.7 ast Score 90
UT ArlingtonBetterColorado St
UTA offense289th of 366 · -8.9
CSUBig
CSU defense61st of 366 · +1.2
UTA defense211th of 366 · -5.4
CSUSmall
CSU offense103rd of 366 · -1.2
Backcourt-0.3 · 1 player
CSUSmall
Backcourt+1.8 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.8 · 4 players
CSUBig
Frontcourt+5.0 · 2 players
Bench+0.0 · 1 player
Even
Bench-0.7 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestUTA betterCSU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
UT Arlington
Guards
M. Panoam6 min · TRN. Shelby3 min · TRJ. SmithNewT. HankinsNewK. MikalauskasNewJ. ParkerNew
Forwards
T. McDaniels27 min · TRM. Goodman13 minB. McGlothin5 min · TRN. Bundalo3 min · TRT. SimicNewS. HadnotNew
Colorado St
Guards
J. Menard29 min · TRJ. Pascarelli27 minJ. Butler26 minJ. McIver12 minR. SawyerNewP. DunsonNew
Forwards
K. Jorgensen26 minC. Booth25 minR. Mbemba18 minC. Dortch2 minA. MillerNewD. TedeschiNew
Centers
J. ClarkNew
In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Shooting
Possessions
Defense
UTACSU
Scoring
67.7 #320Points per game74.8 #169
1.01 #319Points per possession1.16 #44
67.3 #265Pace (possessions)64.4 #355
Shooting
47.2 #332Effective FG%57.5 #12
29.1 #3523-point %38.6 #9
30.7 #3453-point attempt rate49.1 #19
42.5 #24Free throw rate39.4 #69
Possessions
20.7 #354Turnover rate18.5 #298
34.9 #50Offensive rebound rate30.0 #198
10.7 #345Assists per game15.6 #62
Defense
67.8 #29Points allowed71.6 #95
1.01 #30Points allowed per possession1.11 #241
47.5 #29Opponent effective FG%52.9 #263
26.9 #1Opponent 3-point %34.2 #196
18.0 #93Turnovers forced15.4 #255
69.9 #166Defensive rebound rate70.8 #123
7.3 #97Steals per game5.2 #320
3.5 #148Blocks per game2.1 #338
From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

UT Arlington

16-14 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · United Athletic Conference

Last five, 2025-26
  • Lvs Utah Valley65–67
  • Wvs Southern Utah69–63
  • W@ Abilene Chrstn64–57
  • W@ Tarleton St65–60
  • L@ CA Baptist56–68

A week or more of rest.

Colorado St

20-13 in 2025-26 overall · 12-10 in conference · Pac-12 Conference

Last five, 2025-26
  • Lvs Saint Joseph's64–69
  • Lvs San Diego St62–71
  • Wvs Fresno St67–63
  • Lvs Boise St67–78
  • W@ New Mexico82–74

A week or more of rest.